During our Week 1 session we covered the following topics:
HISTORY
We discussed the history of newspapers going digital, specifically the onslaught of newspaper-based websites in the mid-1990s. Timeline histories from the Poynter Institute, most interestingly, include 1991, 1994, 1995 and 1996, which can all be accessed here.
What stood out in the timeline was that the bulk of major newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times (1996), launched in their sites in the mid-1990s.
I made the point that newspapers at the time only saw websites as mirrors of their core product, the newspaper. They were seen as ways toward "alternate delivery" of the paper that could cut print costs.
We got some laughs watching a video, "The Tablet Newspaper," that demonstrated that point. In it an editor says that new technology will provide "a bridge of familiarity" for newspaper readers as they go digital.
NEWS ORGS TRY TO MAINTAIN
I argued that this mindset remains today: That newspapers and TV news operations have not fully embraced the inevitability of online migration and the dominance of digital news.
In broadcasting the story's the same, but via a different tact: Local news stations see online as a way to drive viewers to the telecast, not vice-versa, which one of you pointed out was the way most people see a TV news site.
The reason? They want to capture younger eyeballs they're losing during newscasts, which are still cash cows, albeit diminishing ones.
An ad in a newspaper is worth about 10 times, often more, than what it's worth online. The contrast is even larger for television. The flipside?
The DIY revolution: It often takes far fewer people to put together a digital news operation, and thus the advertising scale can actually make it profitable for some.
BLOGGERS RISE
